Re: CSS: %% length unit. Proposal.

> (I'm confused with your examples as well, I know what you mean with some
> examples, but that is just because I'm human.)

> With 'calc', this is not the case.

:)  Trust me with the calc situation even worse:

For example layout like (four inline blocks: f1,f2,f3,f4):
|<--25%%-->|<--fixed:100px-->|<--50%%--->|<--25%%-->|
(Again %% means here percentage from free space = contentWidth-100px)

Following your logic this should be represented by formula like this:
f1{
   width:calc(25%-33px);
}
f3{
  width:calc(50%-33px);
}
f4{
  width:calc(25%-33px);
}
Right?

Algorithm which will force sutuations like: 100px = 33px+33px+33px
is extremely bad.  Moreover:
If you have three calculated values dependant from fourth you will NEVER
reach what you want.
Discrete math.

Beg my pardon, is it clear what I mean here?

One more problem with calc():
Formulas in styles will force designer to put dependant values in different
formulas. See example above.

No human will be able to handle such calculations with any *real* layout
where he/she should follow and recalculate each time depandencies like this.
Only software. Personaly I am happy about that as designers will be forced
to buy my blocknote.net but I don't think this is an intention of W3C.

Andrew Fedoniouk.
http://terrainformatica.com



> > Let's say we have layout like this:
> > |<--25%%-->|<--fixed:100px-->|<------75%%------>|
> >
> > What formulas do you propose F1 and F2 to achieve the same?
> > |<---F1-->|<--fixed:100px-->|<-------F2-------->|
> >
> > E.g.  it could be:
> > F1 = -100px + 50%  or  F1 = 50% - 100px
>
> Huh?!
>
>  f1{
>   width:calc(25%-50px);
>  }
>  f2{
>   width:calc(75%-50px);
>  }
>
> The problem with your proposal is that is it totally unclear what should
happen,
> just look at Dave Hyatt responses.'
>
> (I'm confused with your examples as well, I know what you mean with some
> examples, but that is just because I'm human.)
>
> With 'calc', this is not the case.
>

Received on Saturday, 8 May 2004 14:13:44 UTC